NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. GULSHER AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the Appellant/Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -I, Sirmaur at Nahan, H.P., dated 7.9.2005, vide which, a sum of Rs. 4.00 lacs has been awarded in favour of the claimants (Respondents No. 1 to 3 herein), alongwith interest.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that Respondents No. 1 to 3 (hereinafter referred to as the claimants) filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act. They alleged that they are the son, daughter and widow of one Balkeesh, who was working as a labourer on a 1 truck bearing registration No. HNX -1295 belonging to Respondents No. 4 and 5 (original Respondents No. 1 and 2 before the learned Tribunal). It was alleged that the accident took place due to rash or negligent driving of the driver of the truck resulting in instantaneous death at the spot. The legal heirs of the deceased has filed the claim petition alleging that the age of the deceased was 42 years, he was earning Rs. 3,600/ - per month while working as a labourer and in all a sum of Rs. 8.00 lac was claimed as compensation.

(3.) THE learned Tribunal vide its impugned award held that the accident was the result of rash or negligent driving of the driver and the Petitioners being the legal heirs of the deceased are entitled to compensation. In regard to the question as to whether the deceased was a gratuitous passenger, it was held that the deceased was not sitting in the truck as a gratuitous passenger but was sitting as a labourer. In regard to the license it was held that the driver was possessing a valid driving license to drive a heavy goods vehicle but the license was valid upto 21.12.1992 and had expired already on the date of the accident on 18.6.2004. However, it was held that even if the license had expired but since the deceased driver was having a valid license earlier and the expiry of the license was not held to be a breach of the condition and as such, the petition was allowed and a sum of Rs. 4.00 lac was awarded as against all the Respondents. There was no specific order if the amount was payable by Respondent No. 3/Insurance company or by Respondents No. 1 and 2 i.e. the owners of the vehicle.